IN
THE NAME OF HUMAN RIGHTS
By
Maung Tha Hla
The Human Rights issue is a noble purpose to pursue, but
if misled conscientiously or unconscientiously it might just be the opposite,
leading to the probability of bringing misunderstanding upon the objective and
integrity of the pursuers.
The
Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted on December 10, 1948 in
consequence of the Second World War and ever since mania for human rights has
captivated the West which takes a role to set a moral standard by their own
utopian notions. The crux of the matter is that centuries before and decades
after the adoption of the Declaration the European expansion of empery had
denatured the so-called Third World into living hell flagrantly violating the
dignity of person of the servile people who lived in subhuman conditions in
their own lands. Regrettably, the
Western society who claimed moral high ground, despite the gory past,
condescendingly decried the former colonies, which were being besieged by
political crisis and social exigency, the intrinsic legacy of Imperial Empires
of the bygone days. Over the years there was the mushroom-growth of
organizations mostly based in Europe, which claimed to be working for the cause
of human rights. But one is constrained to question the devotional claim and
cast doubt on the dedication and integrity of self-assertive organizations as
most of them have become agents and the mouthpiece of special interest groups.
The recent inter-communal strife in Rakhaing state of Myanmar is a case in
point. They slavishly mounted a slew of charges against Myanmar of alleged
mistreatment of the illegal immigrant Bengalis.
THE
ORGAN GRINDER AND THE MONKEYS: It is much of a conspiracy that once the
Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) woefully howled echoing canards of
illegal Bengali secessionists, the Human Rights monkeys sprang up to franticly
dance to the tune wailing over the alleged violation of Bengali human rights.
The parallels are striking between the OIC and Human Rights Organizations which
not only made adverse comments about the government for its handling of the
Bengali matters but also strewed lopsided reports demonizing the indigenous
Rakhaings who had long been fallen victims to atrocities committed by the
pugnacious alien Bengalis in the course of the virulent campaign for a free
Islamic state in the Rakhaing land. The
Bengali Muslims ruthlessly slaughtered the once dominant Rakhaing communities
of Maungdaw and Buthidaung townships where they squatted in the looted lands, having
made up the majority in the ratio of 97 to 3 per cent over the indigenes; yet
the Bengalis, who lived by the legacy of lies, played the victim card, hurling
accusations at the native Rakhaings of ethnic cleansing.
The
United Nations Organization, which is supposed to be icon of morality and
impartiality, is suffering from credibility problem as it now buckled under
pressure of the OIC comprising of 57 Muslim nations and European Union of 28
Christian nations, let alone being bypassed by regional groups such as the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) or used as a tool by powerful nations
to advance their political agenda. The world organization, which had been
increasingly in partnership with the powerful groups, passed Resolution
(A/C.3/68/L.55) on situation of human rights in Myanmar, which was sponsored,
with the OIC's approbation, by the European nations plus the United States. It
brought pressure bearing upon Myanmar to allow equal access to full citizenship
for alien Bengali separatists in contravention of the law of Myanmar. Also the resolution spewed accusations of
religious persecution, racial discrimination and human rights violation against
the Muslims but purposely pretermitted the Bengali atrocities and violation of
human rights against the native population, nor did it reflect on the perfidy
of the British imported Bengalis who raised the banner of Mujtahid separatist
movement for an Islamic state which they laid a plan to accede to their former
homeland, now Bangladesh. It is the general notion that citizenship comes with
loyalty to the host nation compounded with the obligation to uphold its
constitution, solute the national flag, adapt to the native language, admire
native culture, tolerate the religion of the land, and thus assimilating into
the life of adopted country.
Notwithstanding the egregious breach of the above fundamentals, the
organization pushed for the citizenship of illegal Bengalis, having touted the
politically motivated terminology which the Bengalis had hankered after in
excuse of the demand for the entitlement to a national race, and hence a free
Islamic state. The world organization
unjustly rested onus of Bengali delictum with the host nation. The partisan
resolution could only be construed as interference in the internal affairs of
Myanmar, hence amounting to impingement on the sovereignty of a member nation.
How
prejudicial is the resolution of the world organization, but what is more
reprehensible is a set of parochial reports by the human rights organizations
predisposed to anti-Myanmar agenda, which are perfect examples of how a
situation can be exploited and facts distorted to serve the political purpose
of an interest group. Sadly there seem to be no bottom to the pit of abasement
in which some organizations and apologists had been falling, who throve on the
business of human rights.
Special
rapporteurs or independent experts are appointed by the Geneva-based United
Nations Human Rights Council to examine and report back on a country situation
or a specific human rights theme. The
positions are honorary and the experts are not UN staff, nor are they paid for
their work. That he was not paid for his
work prompted the public to frown at UN expert Thomas Ojea Quintana who accused
Myanmar of committing "genocide" against the illegal Bengalis in the
greatly exaggerated report based on the fabricated Bengali source. He went too far reporting with complete
impunity morphed accounts on Bengali situation, which only tarnished the image
of the world organization. The worst was that he overstepped the mandate to
demand granting of citizenship to the disfranchised Bengali separatists, thus
encroaching on Myanmar's sovereign.
Human
Right Watch made public a one-sided and offensive report on inter-communal
riots in Myanmar. Despite its claim being so upright and impartial the
organization was criticized for its unfair and biased reporting on the human
rights by national governments, other NGOs, the media and even its founder and
Chairman Emerita Robert Bernstein. It came under criticism on the issues in
Eritrea and Ethiopia and the Arab-Israel conflict. The HRW which depended on
wealthy donors had to comply with the desire of financiers who liked to see its
reports made headlines which the media had put in the limelight. Accusations were also leveled against it for
being influenced by US foreign policy with regard to unbalanced reporting on
Latin America and the Palestinians. That's bad enough, but worse was the
accusation that it requested donations from Saudi Arabian citizens on the basis
of criticism of Israel; which posed a vex question as to the integrity of the
author and credibility of the lopsided report on Myanmar, wildly deploying the
terms, "crime against humanity", "ethnic cleansing" and "genocide".
HUMAN
RIGHTS OR BENGALI RIGHTS: In seeking to achieve their goal the alien Bengalis
made desperate efforts through powerful Islamic lobbyists to boost political
influence courting Western proxies. The self-seeking, multicultural zealots who
see nothing but to pander to the Muslim world were using their political clout
to enforce a permanent solution to the illegal Bengali issue embarking on the
infringement upon the sovereignty of Myanmar.
Posing in the forefront as key players was the duo of the United States
and the United Kingdom, which ridiculously asserted that the belligerent
Bengali Muslims were innocent victims of Buddhist aggression. Siding with the
Bengali secessionists they demanded citizenship rights for them. The Bengali problem started with the British
colonialists who imported them for their invested interests and now the United
States which had been the chief target of Muslim hate campaign thrust itself as
the champion of the Bengali rights with sole purpose of pacifying the
anti-American Muslim world. Being
powerful is not a license to manipulate the internal affairs of others.
Why
was the United States, which had been duped into leading the NATO to establish
an Islamic State in the heart of Europe, so impassioned about the Jihadist
Bengali separatists who slyly sought the patronage of the powerful West to help
bring their separatist movement into the vortex of international politics
having deluded themselves into the precedent of Kosovo? In virtue of the
potential levers of economic sanction against Myanmar the United States, which
had been in the business of aggressive lobbying with illusion about possibility
of making the illegal Bengalis citizens of Myanmar and entitlement to a
national race, escalated its efforts to shape a pro-Bengali strategy in such
intensity that it came to the point of raising a question as to whether it was
lobbying or abuse of super power position.
The
American pressure cooker gathered steam with the visits of state actors. Barack
Obama was followed by former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, with
Ex-British Prime Minister Tony Blair following in his footsteps. They all are
peace-brokers by their own rights, who were involved in peace missions and
human rights campaign; at the same time none of them had a success in the
Middle East peace process, the trade mark of the nation's highest office. It was of much doubt whether their righteous
orations, which much the same as the language of OIC stooges of human rights
syndicate, would help bring about a solution to the communal conflict in
Myanmar, and in the least their patronizing remarks would have positive effects
on the natives, if not make them feel like sickening.
Interestingly,
timing of Clinton's visit coincided with that of European Union delegation
headed by foreign policy chief, Catherine Aston, being trailed by the OIC
delegation. Concurrently, the coercive measures effectuated in Myanmar were
complemented at the home front where a Bengali delegation was received in
audience by the Senate foreign relation committee, which resulted in
introduction of House Resolution 418, which if adopted would urge Myanmar to
end the persecution of illegal Bengali Muslims. However, any fair-minded
lawmaker would not compromise his or her conscience to go along with the resolution
since it failed to address the violence and crimes perpetrated by the Bengali
immigrants against the indigenous people. It may be noted that a similar
pro-Bengali resolution was doomed in 2010.
It is not surprising that the powerful Islamic lobbying was gaining
influence on the American foreign policy issues given the instance that Obama
had faithfully played a pro-Bengali card in his Islamic surrogate mission to
Myanmar in 2012.
HYPOCRISY
AT WORK: It is plain hypocrisy that the bigoted Muslim countries which
consolidated into a world Muslim organization nursed feeling of solidarity with
the Islamist Bengali separatists and exerted pressure on Myanmar demanding to
take measures to eliminate the alleged offences of religious persecution and
racial discrimination, notwithstanding human rights violation and persecution
of religious minorities were the order of the day in their own nations. Following the disintegration of Sadden
Hussein's Iraq and Gaddafi's Libya, the powerful Islamic nations which vied for
leadership of the Muslim world conveniently exploited the inter-communal
violence of Rakhaing state in hopes of redressing the failure to mollify the
ongoing turmoil across the Muslim world, particularly the Middle East which had
been convulsed with the deadly sectarian conflicts among the Muslims who
claimed themselves being the most peaceful and nonviolent people on earth.
Among
the leading Muslim countries that rallied behind the illegal Bengali
separatists were Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Egypt as
well as Islamic members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which
unfairly played upon the inter-communal conflict to their own advantage,
despite their own notorious human rights records. Turkey, for one, bolstered by
the prestige of membership to the NATO, thrust itself forward as the global
protector of Muslim rights having put up a good show through the visits to
Myanmar of Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu accompanied by teary-eyed Mrs.
Emine Erdogan and crying OIC secretary-general Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, who led
the organization delegation, in a measure to demonstrate the Turkish leading
role in promoting the welfare and the human rights of the Bengali Muslims. It is ironic that Turkey denounced Myanmar
for the speculative genocide of alien Bengalis against its horrific past and
prevailing situation in human rights violation. Turning to its past, the
country was still haunted by the ineffaceable crime against humanity and the
1915 genocide of Christian Armenians, the first ever of the sort in the history
of modern world, which was perpetrated at the height of the Ottoman Empire that
comprised an area covering 45 sovereign nations today. Pope Francis bestowed
sainthood on "Martyrs of Otranto", to honour the 813 Italians who
were slain in the southern Italian city in 1480 for defying demands by Turkish
invaders who overran the citadel to renounce Christianity. The modern day
Turkey is not exonerated from the ethnic cleansing being blatantly executed
against the Kurds and Arab minorities as well as religious persecution of the
Alevis. Did the Turkish First Lady or
the OIC secretary general ever shad tears over such crimes? Is it not hypocrisy
that espoused their pious hearts bleed for the Islamist separatist
Bengalis?
Saudi
Arabia, which has ironically been elected to serve on the United Nations Human
Rights Council, used religion as a tool of oppression. The kingdom, which is
the chief promoter of international Islamic fundamentalism and the backbone of
the OIC, reached the deep pocket to insensately impose Islam on the non-Muslim
nations and pulverize other religions. It sanctimoniously condemned Myanmar for
religious persecution, ethnic cleansing and human rights violations of the
jihadist Bengalis, despite its own record of human and civil rights violations
and the religious persecution of Shiite Muslims in the kingdom where no other
religion was allowed to establish or being practised, much less a non-Muslim
would ever take the risk of being beheaded to set foot in Mecca. Pakistan is the home of the world's most
notorious hatcheries for fanatic jihadists and suicide bombers, where sectarian
butchering of minority Shiites and attacking Christians, Ahmadis and Hindus
were unchecked. The Pakistani Taliban who carried out deadly suicide mission
day in and day out declared to attack Myanmar to avenge their Muslim brothers.
Iran is infamous for human rights violations and persecution of religious
minorities such as Sunni and Sufi Muslims, Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians;
so too is Bangladesh which is ill-famed for discrimination against religious
minorities, such as Hindus, Buddhists, Christians and other Muslim minorities.
Egypt was widely criticized for persecution of the Coptic Christians as well as
Shiite and Sufi minorities. In Indonesia where Ahmadis were persecuted and
Christians attacked, the religious extremists stoked religious violence against
the local Buddhists in reprisal for the alleged persecution of Muslim brothers
in Myanmar. Malaysia is not exculpatory of discrimination against minorities,
where the Islamic fundamentalism is on the rise.
CONCLUSION:
In a twist of event Myanmar which transformed itself into a democratic society
on being aspired to wiggle free from the economic sanctions imposed by the West
placed great expectation to foster close relationship with the West,
particularly the United States.
Appreciative as was of the continued commitment to the country's
transition to democracy, nonetheless all that was anticipated turned to
somewhat disenchantment over the unwarranted Western pressure in favour of the
illegitimate demands made by the disfranchised Bengalis based on beguiled
claims. The Bengali Muslims are small in numbers but are lousy on the
international scene and awfully good on manipulating the general public. The
bellicose rhetoric addressing on the identity woes compounded with religious
colouring not only agitated the Muslim world but also held the Western audience
spell-bound. The Bengali population who concentrates in Rakhaing state
constitutes a fraction of the Muslim community in Myanmar. They are not
recognized by the government of Myanmar as a national race, nor were they
featured as an indigenous race by the Imperialist British but only categorized
them in the religion grouping along with other Muslims from different parts of
India. Those who brought pressure on Myanmar should not ignore that the
Islamist separatists Bengalis were economic immigrants from what is now
Bangladesh, who fought the national army flying Pakistan flag, or the fact that
the Bengalis looked always towards their Muslim brothers abroad, al-Qaeda and
Taliban operatives inclusive, consolidating the Islamic solidarity. They have
thus become a menace to the national security.
Myanmar
would not be intimidated or blackmailed. Any measure under foreign pressure
could prove counter-productive. Myanmar cannot be pressured to accept the
demand for carte blanche citizenship of illegal Bengali immigrants. No country
in the world even the United States, an immigrant nation and supposedly the
most democratic society, welcomes just anybody who makes it across the border,
grants unrestricted mass immigration or unscreened citizenship, let alone to
recognize them as a national race with the constitutional rights to a political
entity in the Union and a separate state within its territory. Given the current situation in Myanmar the
nationality question along with immigration regulation is the sine qua non of
national security. From Myanmar perspective the values whereon the Western
nations took a stand are secondary to the top priority of national security.